GTP Cool Wall: 1996-2001 Toyota Chaser Tourer V

  • Thread starter Thread starter White & Nerdy
  • 117 comments
  • 17,479 views

1996-2001 Toyota Chaser Tourer V

  • Total voters
    109
  • Poll closed .
Rage Racer
What car activities are 'cool' then?
Click to expand...

Not being a dangerous douche on public roads and having the maturity to act knowing that your hobby belongs in a controlled environment makes you cool. Maturity and modesty are big parts of being cool. Irresponsible douches are uncool.

As far as drifters, bro do you even own a DC Shoes Flatbill hat?
 
Zenith
Not being a dangerous douche on public roads and having the maturity to act knowing that your hobby belongs in a controlled environment makes you cool. Maturity and modesty are big parts of being cool. Irresponsible douches are uncool.
Click to expand...
Maybe I said it wrong. I didn't mean public roads. I meant a track (yes there is a racing circuit not far from where I live, it's not big but hosts professional championships, including drift events), or at least some space of asphalt free of traffic (if you find one really safe).

Zenith
As far as drifters, bro do you even own a DC Shoes Flatbill hat?
Click to expand...
No, do I have to? Is it a necessary part of drifting culture in your country?
 
It's very difficult to traverse the line between "handsome" and "anonymous." That was more true than ever in the late 90s (though the late 1960s would fight that as well), when many cars similar to this one were running around. This falls very deeply into the former, I'm afraid. Not helping is that it also falls very much on the wrong side of "looking like the contemporary Camry".
 
Sub Zero for me, put FMIC, low mount single turbo, ECU, proper coilover, LSD, etc 350+HP, would be my ideal daily driver :D

Something like this :

7089000034_large.jpg
 
Adamgp
It's more like 3200-3300lb range.

Also the specs I found were 0-60 in low 6's and a 1/4 in mid-low 14's. Not all that impressive.
Click to expand...

Not sure about the 400m times, but those 0-60 numbers aren't accurate... because those are direct transpositions of the 0-100 times, and the two simply aren't interchangeable. Many cars shift up into third gear just before 100 km/h. This adds something like two-tenths to half-a-second to the 0-100 km/h times.

A low 6 to 100 km/h usually equates to a mid- to high- 5 second time. Not bad for a land barge, better than a V8 Impala SS from around the same time or even the E34 M5.

I know America is the land of eight second minivans (which, in 100 km/h times is around nine seconds), but I've never found any car that hit 100 km/h in just over six seconds "not all that impressive."

0-100 times, though, are totally not cool. If you've done as many 0-100 km/h times as I have (over two hundred cars and counting), you start to realize what an arbitrary, unrealistic and utterly useless measure of driving fun they are.
 
Uncool. I don't doubt it's a good car or a fast car, but it's just not that interesting to me. Also you'd have a really tough time explaining to anyone that isn't a car person what makes it special.
 
niky
Not sure about the 400m times, but those 0-60 numbers aren't accurate... because those are direct transpositions of the 0-100 times, and the two simply aren't interchangeable. Many cars shift up into third gear just before 100 km/h. This adds something like two-tenths to half-a-second to the 0-100 km/h times.

A low 6 to 100 km/h usually equates to a mid- to high- 5 second time. Not bad for a land barge, better than a V8 Impala SS from around the same time or even the E34 M5.

I know America is the land of eight second minivans (which, in 100 km/h times is around nine seconds), but I've never found any car that hit 100 km/h in just over six seconds "not all that impressive."

0-100 times, though, are totally not cool. If you've done as many 0-100 km/h times as I have (over two hundred cars and counting), you start to realize what an arbitrary, unrealistic and utterly useless measure of driving fun they are.
Click to expand...

I got the numbers off a couple different sites, and yes they are 0-60 times. MPH, not KPH.

Also, the Chaser is some 800lbs lighter and about 2 feet shorter than a 94-96 Impala SS. Not all that surprised it is faster, since it was even rated at more power. It also has the advantage of a manual transmission and an extra gear in said transmission.
 
niky
0-100 times, though, are totally not cool. If you've done as many 0-100 km/h times as I have (over two hundred cars and counting), you start to realize what an arbitrary, unrealistic and utterly useless measure of driving fun they are.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I recall someone took issue with me saying something along these lines a while back. I'd driven two cars, one of which had a 0-60 time faster than the other on paper, yet subjectively felt slower on the road. Apparently this meant I wasn't doing my job properly or something. You know how these things go...

I tend to give them a mention in reviews but put little stock in them as a means of comparison. Ultimately it's the butt dyno that matters more than the numbers on paper.
 
Seriously uncool, looks bland if left normal but most are hideous with stupid wheels and lowered too much etc.

The while scene with this car makes it uncool for me.
 
Mark II Blit
The Chaser could easily be mistaken for a Carina E if you're not into cars, and then you'll again have to explain to your peers why you splashed out all your savings on something that looks like a car for a tenth of the price.
Click to expand...

Granted, it is true that a Carina and Chaser look similar, considering they're built by the same company on the same platform, but about having to explain the difference... why does this matter?

If you are a car fan, why do you care what a non-car fan thinks? You haven't bought it to impress them and if you have, you're an idiot. Chasers are cool, and the people whose opinion you'll care about will either agree with you, or disagree with you with some justification and backup. If it's someone who doesn't like cars, I don't see why you'd care what they think anyway.
 
Solid cool for me, its a rwd sedan with good power from a good engine
Also explaining why a car is good to people who dont know about cars seems kinda pointless in my opinion
 
Adamgp
I got the numbers off a couple different sites, and yes they are 0-60 times. MPH, not KPH.

Also, the Chaser is some 800lbs lighter and about 2 feet shorter than a 94-96 Impala SS. Not all that surprised it is faster, since it was even rated at more power. It also has the advantage of a manual transmission and an extra gear in said transmission.
Click to expand...

Then they're pretty much wrong, unless they're backed up by a review or direct source... considering that the Chaser wasn't sold in any MPH-using markets. Most I can find is that factory claims low 6's, while independent testing shows some stock units just under 6 to 100. Which, again, is in the mid-5s to 60 mph... which , again, is pretty good for a barge.

I see a LOT of websites claiming 0-60 mph times transposed directly from 0-100 km/h times. Rule of thumb is: If it's not sourced directly from US magazine tests, it's not a 0-60 time. (and if it's sourced from Car and Driver, it's going to be faster still due to roll-out and SAE corrections they apply). I've done a crapload of V-Box runs, and the difference, trust me, is half-a-second to a second long. Even with an automatic.

Still:

homeforsummer
I... put little stock in them as a means of comparison. Ultimately it's the butt dyno that matters more than the numbers on paper.
Click to expand...

0-60 or 0-62 are completely artificial metrics. What matters is when you want the power, you've got power. A Forester XT might supposedly hit 100 km/h faster than a diesel Kia Sorento, but the diesel Sorento punches much harder when you're pulling out to overtake, and can complete that overtake first. Response uber alles.
 
Yup. Most important for me, most of the time, is the way a car gets from maybe 40/50 mph to 80 mph, as that's the typical overtaking scenario speed. The modern turbocharged stuff is pretty special over that range, as most cars now can do that in one gear (usually third).
 
niky
Then they're pretty much wrong, unless they're backed up by a review or direct source... considering that the Chaser wasn't sold in any MPH-using markets. Most I can find is that factory claims low 6's, while independent testing shows some stock units just under 6 to 100. Which, again, is in the mid-5s to 60 mph... which , again, is pretty good for a barge.

I see a LOT of websites claiming 0-60 mph times transposed directly from 0-100 km/h times. Rule of thumb is: If it's not sourced directly from US magazine tests, it's not a 0-60 time. (and if it's sourced from Car and Driver, it's going to be faster still due to roll-out and SAE corrections they apply). I've done a crapload of V-Box runs, and the difference, trust me, is half-a-second to a second long. Even with an automatic.

Still:
Click to expand...

As I said before, the times I listed were 0-60mph, not 0-100kph. I'm aware of the difference. :rolleyes:

Haven't found a source yet that has lists a 0-60 time for a 1jz Chaser below 6 seconds. If it seems slow, well can't help you there.
 
Liquid
Granted, it is true that a Carina and Chaser look similar, considering they're built by the same company on the same platform, but about having to explain the difference... why does this matter?

If you are a car fan, why do you care what a non-car fan thinks? You haven't bought it to impress them and if you have, you're an idiot. Chasers are cool, and the people whose opinion you'll care about will either agree with you, or disagree with you with some justification and backup. If it's someone who doesn't like cars, I don't see why you'd care what they think anyway.
Click to expand...

It just isn't a cool car. It looks like a sedan that debuted on an unrelated platform four years prior, and compared to the Chaser, the Carina actually looks much more modern and, dare I say it, exciting.

For me, a cool car should strike a good balance between appealing to the non-car fan and the enthusiast without being too obscure or too brash. It should have something that makes it stand out, something to make people smile and/or reminisce about old times. The Chaser is too dull to appeal to anything but very limited audience in the West, and it is one of the uncoolest crowds out there. The cars posted on the last few pages speak for themselves.
 
Slash
0-60 in 7 seconds isn't exactly slow. It's not race car fast, but you know you are accelerating pretty good.
Click to expand...

This, I'm not sure how anyone can think 6 or 7 seconds 0-60 is slow. Most cars are probably 9-10.
 
Slash
0-60 in 7 seconds isn't exactly slow. It's not race car fast, but you know you are accelerating pretty good.
Click to expand...

QFT.

I cannot understand the quest for extreme performance outside a track. Come on people, you'll never use a car that's race-car fast in real-life streets to a 10% of it's actual potential. You'll never need more than 300 or so HP in the streets or highways, even that is more than enough to get you in serious trouble if you're not careful and it's more than enough to have some hoontastic fun when the road conditions allow it. Actually, there was once a very well written and very well thought off article about this on Jalopnik, I'll try to find it...
 
Adamgp
As I said before, the times I listed were 0-60mph, not 0-100kph. I'm aware of the difference. :rolleyes:

Haven't found a source yet that has lists a 0-60 time for a 1jz Chaser below 6 seconds. If it seems slow, well can't help you there.
Click to expand...

Citations, then. As I was explaining to you... And this is coming from someone whose job includes both testing for these figures and publishing them, these sites copy-paste 0-100 times as 0-60 times incorrectly.

These same sites list PS as bhp without bothering to do conversions, either.

Again, metric car. No reputable road tests done in mph. Can't make such claims based on sloppy internet journalism. (And that's from an internet journalist) It's as foolish as claiming a first-gen R35 has 550 bhp because of one fuzzy dyno sheet.

And... Seriously, since when are sixes for a full-sized four door slow?
 
Joey D
This, I'm not sure how anyone can think 6 or 7 seconds 0-60 is slow. Most cars are probably 9-10.
Click to expand...

As my Grandfather has said for the past 20 years, "if you're going to 60 MPH in less than 7 seconds, you are absolutely flying."

Add to it the absurdity that your average V6 family sedan is now breaking into the high 5s to 60 MPH, it's an absolutely outrageous thing to consider, especially when little more than 10 years ago, V8 Camaros and Mustangs weren't all that much faster.
 
Tornado
But the acceleration, man! It's clearly making 480 horsepower at the wheels.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Those times were achieved on cut slicks by a factory driver. Doesn't count. :D
 
niky
0-60 or 0-62 are completely artificial metrics. What matters is when you want the power, you've got power. A Forester XT might supposedly hit 100 km/h faster than a diesel Kia Sorento, but the diesel Sorento punches much harder when you're pulling out to overtake, and can complete that overtake first. Response uber alles.
Click to expand...

That's what I say about my car, but all the response I get is "LOL, your car is J-body and has low specific output so automatically is useless and slow and is girl car".
 
I bet my Kia could still beat your car, even with it's "inferior" engine and a 4-speed slushbox.
 
White & Nerdy
That's what I say about my car, but all the response I get is "LOL, your car is J-body and has low specific output so automatically is useless and slow and is girl car".
Click to expand...

Except the difference being you have a tendency to make it out to be way better than it is. That's where you are wrong.

Azure Flare
I bet my Kia could still beat your car, even with it's "inferior" engine and a 4-speed slushbox.
Click to expand...

By his logic, everything that is smaller and doesn't make at least 250+ horsepower sucks.


Yeah, I'll take my ATC and still out accelerate it.
 
White & Nerdy
That's what I say about my car, but all the response I get is "LOL, your car is J-body and has low specific output so automatically is useless and slow and is girl car".
Click to expand...
No. You say that your car is fast (and in some cases faster than legitimately quicker cars) because of its torque curve. There's quite a large difference between the two sentiments.
 
Tornado
No. You say that your car is fast (and in some cases faster than legitimately quicker cars) because of its torque curve. There's quite a large difference between the two sentiments.
Click to expand...

Well, for what it is, it is. Although some cross-shoppable cars can beat it in a straight-up acceleration contest (though not as many as you'd think - mainstream compacts have stagnated badly in terms of performance in the last 20 years), it's got the speed where you'll use it most on the road. (Not really fair to compare modern equivalent sports compacts, as they've opened up such a gap over their standard variants that they're really not in the same class of cars anymore. No one's going to get upsold from a Focus SES to a Focus ST, or cross-shop that Focus ST with a top-line Cruze or Dart).
 
niky
Citations, then. As I was explaining to you... And this is coming from someone whose job includes both testing for these figures and publishing them, these sites copy-paste 0-100 times as 0-60 times incorrectly.

These same sites list PS as bhp without bothering to do conversions, either.

Again, metric car. No reputable road tests done in mph. Can't make such claims based on sloppy internet journalism. (And that's from an internet journalist) It's as foolish as claiming a first-gen R35 has 550 bhp because of one fuzzy dyno sheet.

And... Seriously, since when are sixes for a full-sized four door slow?
Click to expand...

Show me where I said this car is slow in this thread? All I said was that it wasn't that impressive.

I did look for my source again, and it was for the Chaser from F&F Tokyo Drift. Didn't notice that before.

http://forum.ebaumsworld.com/archive/index.php/t-139255.html

If it was set up for drifting, that is likely why the times are off. Plus it was probably a beat to hell movie car.
 

Latest Posts

Back